preparing the workforce of dc's future 1 5

8/13/2019 Preparing the Workforce of DC's Future 1 5

1/76

1

PREPARING THE WORKFORCE

OF DCS FUTURE Toward a

Career-TechnicalEducation System

for the Capital Stateof the 21st Century

Office of Career & Tec hnical Education

District of ColumbiaPublic Schools

Draft, Version 1.5March 2005


2/76

2

TOPIC PAGE

Contents

Introduction:Education, the Workforce, and the Future 3

CTE Today & Tomorrow:21st C entury Skills for a 21st C entury Ec onomy 10Education, Workforce, & Economic Development (Diagram) 14Models of Work-Related Secondary Education (Chart) 17

DCs ChoiceHigh Skills or Low Wages:American Education and the American Dream 18Solution to a Dual C risis: High Skills Educ ation 20CTE: Training of Choice for the Careers of the Future 21CTE in DCFrom Decline to Rebirth & Reinvention 26Sta te Appropriations for Sec onda ry C TE, PY 2005 28

The Gateway AgendaHighways to College & Careers:1. Universal High Performance Education 292. World Class Learning Standards 313. Comprehensive K-Adult Career Development System 314. Individual Opportunity Plans for All Students 325. Gateway Planning Templates 32

Four Paths to College & Careers (chart) 366. Career Academies: CTE-Based SLCs 40

Industries/Clusters/Academies Crosswalk Matrix 417. College/Tech-Prep Program Majors 42

Approved CTE Program Majors, SY 2006 (table) 44Pro-Tech Sample Programs of Study 45

8. DC Regional CTE Delivery System 469. Acc elerated Transitions to Postsecondary Education 4710. DC State Education Transition Policy 4911. New Columbia Gateway Center 5012. J obs for Americas GraduatesDistrict of Columbia 53

13. DC Consortium for Career-Technical Education 5914. Projected Performance Outcomes of CTE Renewal 64

Endnotes 66

Appendix:Selected OCTE Activities, School Year 2003-2004

Colophon C O N T E N T S


3/76

3

reparing the workforce of the future is one of the mostfundamental and essential tasks of any educationalsystemboth from the individual standpoint, and from

the perspective of society as a whole. From the individualstandpoint, success in the labor market is usually a necessary

(although hardly sufficient) founda tion for success in otherarenas of adult life. From the perspective of society as a whole,the ec onomic foundations of soc iety must be maintained aseach generation transitions to the next; if not, every other valueof social life and civilization will soon be compromised.

When the National Institute for Literacy (NIFL) set out in 1994 toidentify the knowledge and skills that every American mustmaster as prerequisites for success in the 21st Century, theydefined 16 universal Equipped for the Future learningstandardsorganized, not in terms of academic subject areas,

but in terms of three primary roles of adult life: parent/familymember, citizen/community member, and worker/workforcemember (cf. http://eff.cls.utk.edu/fundamentals/eff_roles.htm ).

The case can readily be made that succ ess in third role area,the labor market, is an all-but-absolute prerequisite to successin the other two, family and community lifeat least for themajority of ordinary Americans.

From an educational and training standpoint, the laborforce can be divided up into ranges of oc cupations withsimilar skill prerequisites. Models offering sufficient precisionfor most planning purposes identify five ba sic sec tors 1:

The professional sec tor is made up of c areers whichtypically require a four-year baccalaureate degree orhigher as a prerequisite for entry;

The technical sector includes careers which typicallyrequire a two-year assoc iate degree, a diploma, or otherpostsec ondary c ertificate;

The high skills sec tor includes ca reers which require formalon-the-job training but no a postsec ondary credential;

Semiskilled oc cupations require only a high schooldiploma or GED;

Unskilled oc cupations require no more than an eighthgrade level of literacy, or less.

P

I N T R O D U C T I O N


4/76

4

Around the turn of the 20th Century, when the foundations of the American public high school system were laid, the vastmajority of oc cupations fell into what is now the Unskilledcategorythey required no more than an eighth gradeeducation as prerequisite for entry.

Today, a century later, completely unskilled oc cupationsrepresent barely 20% of the labor market. In very roundnumbers, the five sec tors defined above can be treated asroughly equal labor market quintiles. Unskilled and semiskilledoc cupa tions ac count for roughly 40% of a ll jobs. Professionaloc cupations account for slightly over one in five. Tec hnical andhigh skills careers make up almost another 40% 2.

ntil the passage of the School-to-Work OpportunitiesAct (STWOA) ten years ago, relatively little public

attention was pa id to an apparent paradoxat leastfrom the perspective of workforce preparationin thealloc ation of U.S. educationa l resources. For the better part of half a c entury, upwards of 80% of the energy, enthusiasm, anddedication of the mainstream of public education was focusedon preparing students for barely 20% of all jobs.

In 1957, Harvard President J ames B. Conant launched a grandcrusade to mobilize American education to meet thechallenges of the C old War 3. Within a dec ade, the publicschools of the United States had largely become focused on asingle, overriding objective: to seek out the best and thebrightest among American youth and prepare them to enrollin a four-year, baccalaureate degree program.

Today, both individual ac hievement and school performanceare expressed in terms of SAT (Scholastic Aptitude Test) scoresand AP (Advanced Placement) course takingonly partiallysupplanted of late by the AYP (Adequate Yearly Progress)scores of the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB). A highpercentage of College Prep students has been the badge of a quality high school. The percentage of seniors who declaretheir intention to enter a four-year program has been an indexof teacher accomplishment.

Guidance counselors have seen their primary role as one of helping students ga in admission to the 4-yea r college of theirchoice. Students who make other choices are said to havefailed to go to collegewith a not-very-subtle emphasis onthe word failed .

U



5/76

5

The upside of this postwar focus on prepa ring students for four-year colleges and professional careers is obvious. The emphasison mobilizing the Best and the BrightestConants vision of akind of warrior meritoc racy to mount the ramparts of the C oldWarsuccessfully fostered a significant democ ratization of

higher education in the United States. A much broader sectionof American soc iety has access to higher educ ation today thanwas the c ase at midcentury.

In the first half of the 20th century, lega cy admissionsthechildren of old money alumnidominated enrollments at IvyLeague universities and other elite institutions. Today, almostany talented and energetic student, regardless of gender,ethnicity, or soc ioec onomic status, can rea listically aspire tomatriculate at Harvard, Yale, or an equivalent entry portal towhat used to be a closed Old Boy network.

Until the 1950s, high ability was not a prerequisite to c ollegeadmission, nor high achievement a universal goal of attendance; the Gentlemans C represented a perfectlyac ceptable level of performance. Today, American c ollegegraduates meet world class levels of performance in virtually alldisciplines, and America s postgradua te institutions have fewequals anywhere in the world. Many rapidly growingoc cupations require a four-year degree, and (except duringperiods of recession) the real earnings of college graduateshave resisted the general decline in living standards since 1973.

he downside of the near-exclusive focus on four-yearCollege Prep has been the not-so-benign neglect of what might be called the Forgotten 75%the over

three-fourths of our students who do not secure entry into aprofessional ca reer.

At the high school level, most school systems offer students achoice between three different courses of studynominallyorganized around alternative career objectives. Typically, atleast a third of students have been enrolled in College Prepprimed to pursue a baccalaureate degree a nd thence aprofessional career. Upwards of another third have beenenrolled in vocational/career-technical/workforce educationpreparing for direct entry into a skilled craft occupation,traditionally without the benefit of postsecondary education.

The balance have been consigned to the General course of studya watered-down version of the liberal arts curriculumwhich generally prepares no one for anything in particular.

T



6/76

6

Alternately, lea rning styles have sometimes been said to be anorganizing principle of sec ondary educationwith abstract,classroom lea rners assigned to College Prep, applied, shop-based learners assigned to vocational education, andcooperative education reserved for experiential, work-based

learners.

Even in those terms, the systems priorities have been clear andunmistakable. In the eyes of many teachers and administrators,College Prep students are there to be educated andvocational students are there to be trainedwhile Generalstudents are there to be warehoused , neither educated nortrained.

But in reality, p erce ived a bility levels , not career perspectives orlearning styles, are the true differentiating factoror to put it

another way, the three courses of study have c ome to betreated as tracks . College Prep has become the track for theupper quartile. General educationor more recently, Tec hPrephas been defined as the track for the middle 50%. And inrec ent years, traditional voc ational education has often beenstigmatized as a refuge for low achievers and special needsstudents, presumed to represent the bottom 25%.

As early as kindergarten, a form of educational triage takesplace in many classrooms, as entering students are sorted outinto the College Bound and the Not College Material primarily on the basis of tea c her assump tions a b out the ir inherent, ge netic ally-de termined c og nitive ab ility a nd/ or lea rning style . And not always, but all too often, students

judged Not College Materialand the programs designed toserve themare relega ted to the margins of the educationalenterprise.

There is an obvious issue of equity and c ivil rights posed byability-ba sed tracking: resea rch suggests that I.Q. as weunderstand it is fundamentally an artifac t of the testing process,and that socioeconomic discrimination in fact underlies theprocess of grouping students on the basis of teacher-perceivedability 4.

Middle and upper-middle class students make up the ranks of the College Bound. The children of ordinary working people areusually defined as Not C ollege Material. And the children of thepoor are disproportionately categorized as at-risk or specialneeds students. 5



7/76

7

ut the larger problem presented by what might betermed the College Prep Hegemony is that it functionsas a kind of low performance education system

programming the majority of students for low achievementand that it perpetuates an increasingly profound mismatch

between the outcomes of educa tion and the needs of a highperformance economy.

A nationa l survey released in November 1993 by the NationalCenter for Education Statistics (NC ES) reported that almost 85%of high school students surveyed declared a n intention to enrollin a four-year college or university program when theygraduated from high schoolwith almost 60% intending topursue a professional career and 25% planning to becomeindependent business managers or entrepreneurs. But just a fewmonths ea rlier, what is now the Government Ac countability

Office (GAO) had reported [in Transition From Sc ho ol t o Work ,September, 1993] that only 15% of entering high school studentsactually complete a four-year degree within ten years.

Ma ny nominally College Prep students never actuallymatriculate in a four-yea r institution, and nea rly 50% of thosewho do enroll drop out before graduation. The lower astudents family income, the grea ter the likelihood they willdrop out. Beyond that, around 20% of c ollege graduates neversec ure a professional ca reer (upwards of 40% of tec hnical andcommunity college students have previous college experience;upwards of 15% have a lready ea rned a baccalaureate orhigher degree). A recent NCES study concluded that 43% of allfour-year degree holders were underemployed, and fully 2/3 of those with liberal arts degrees 6.

The hard fac t is that the demand for college graduates is notsupply-elastic. The number of jobs which truly demandbaccalaureate degrees as a prerequisite for entry isindependent of the number of applicants. In job markets withan obvious oversupply of four-yea r degree holders, manyemployers start demanding baccalaurea te degrees as aqualification for nonprofessional occupations, simply as a wayof pre-screening for older, more disciplined applicants.

But according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, thepercentage of professional occupations has hovered a round20% for over five decades. BLS projections suggest that, even inthe year 2010, less than a fourth of a ll jobs will require a B.A. orB.S. degree or higher. 7

B



8/76

8

Inevitably, when a four-year degree and a professional ca reer istouted as the ultimate objective of American education, butonly one in five can ever reach that objec tive, the morale of the majority of students is underminedparticularly in thecontext of pervasive ability-based grouping.

However it is pa ckaged, the real significance of the rigid systemof what has been called tracking American style (or TheGreat American Sorting Machine 8) is not lost on the studentsand not surprisingly, its effec t on the motivation and self-esteemof those deemed Not College Material is often quitecatastrophic.

Finding themselves predestined to failure in a system whoseoverriding objective is to prepare students to go on to a four-year college, the Not College Material react in a variety of

ways. Some act out in an unconscious effort to get time off forbad behavior. A few bec ome superac hievers, to confound thesystems gloomy forecast. Many simply drop out in plac e andwait until they are old enough to drop out for real.

Most students enter public schooling intensely curious and fullymotivated, with high self esteem and a love of lea rning. But alltoo typica lly, they exit school twelve years later, if not before,disinterested and poorly motivated, with low self-esteem, lowaspirations, and an active dislike of lea rning.

This is the central paradox of ability-based grouping: a c lassicself-fulfilling prophecy, it functions as a po werful engine of low performance . Although no teacher, no principa l, no schoolboard ever set out to achieve this objective, the myth of thebest and the brightest relegates everyone else to becominginferior and dim.

ronically, this is, it seems, just w ha t the ec ono my need ed a t the time . As J ohn Dewey once observed, every soc iety getsthe educ ationa l system it deserves.

The hidden curriculum of American education for the NotCollege Material has been high toleranc e for boredom, low self-confidence, fear of tardiness, ac ceptance of regimentation, lac kof curiosity, indifference to qua lity, and unquestioningacquiescence to rigid external disciplineand these a re e xac tly the wo rkforce surviva l skills nee ded in an e ra of long -run,a ssem bly line, industria l co mm od ity ma ss p rod uc tion , thecharacteristic mode of production for most of the 20th Century.

I



9/76

9

The unanticipated but functional side effect of ability-basedgrouping and the hegemony of four-year College Prep hasbeen, in effect, to numb up and dumb down the Forgotten75%, so that they could tolerate the dominant industrialregimen of the past six to eight decades.

Today, at the dawn of the third millennium, the Cold War is longover. Today, the national interest of America and the humancommunity as a whole requires a different kind of globalstrugglea struggle against poverty, disease, discrimination,oppression, genoc ide, terrorism, war, environmental decay. Inthe global ec onomy, the sta nd a rd of living a nd q ua lity of life of all Americ ans de pe nds upo n the lab or forc e a s a whole not

just four-year college graduates mee ting o r excee ding w orld standards .

Programming the majority of students for low performancetofollow orders, do the minimum needed to get by, dont askquestions, dont roc k the boa tmay have been tolerablewhen the real core c urriculum of education for the Not CollegeMaterial was adapting to the discipline and the tedious routinesof the traditional factory. But in a production environment thatstresses flexibility instead of docility, creativity instead of conformity, teamwork instead of atomization, communicationskills instead of silent ac quiescenc e, imagination instead of blind obedience, technology instead of time-motion studies,active learning instead of rote memorization, we cant afford toundereducate, undermotivate, or underemploy any of ourcitizens.

The human resource potential of everyone, not justprofessionals, must be realized to the fullest. The entire laborforce must be mobilized on a high engagement, highperformance ba sismust become the Best and the Brightest.And to create this new kind of workforce, a new approach toworkforce education is required.

In 1990, the Commission on the Skills of the AmericanWorkforce, a projec t of the National Center on Education andthe Economy, published a far-reaching report Americas Choice : High Skills or Low Wages that laid much of theconceptual foundation for just this new iteration of vocationaleducation. The STWOA of 1994, followed by the Carl D. PerkinsAc t of 1998, have set the stage in Federal statutes andappropriations for a career-technical education for the 21stCentury .



10/76

10

n implicit underpinning of both the School-to-WorkOpportunities Ac t of 1994 (P.L. 103-329, now sunsetted)and the Carl D. Perkins Voc ational and Tec hnical

Education Act of 1998 (P.L. 105-332, scheduled forreauthorization this spring) is a comprehensive yet integrated

vision of high skills workforce development built upon afoundation of universal high performance education .

Enacted on O ctober 31, 1998the latest reauthorization of Federal voc ational education legislation dating ba ck to theSmith-Hughes Act of 1917Perkins III represents the fifth majorrewrite since the inception of the modern vocational educationprogram in 1963, and the third version to carry the name of thelate Representative Carl D. Perkins (D-Kentucky), a stalwartchampion of vocational education.

The original period of authorization expired J une 30, 2004, andthe House a nd the Senate failed to reach a consensus onPerkins IV prior to the 2004 election. However, hearings havebeen held by both the House of Representatives and theSenate, and successful reauthorization is anticipated in thespring of 2005. Pending reauthorization, an automatic extensionwill maintain the authority of States and the Federalgovernment to continue programming supported under thePerkins Act through J une 30, 2006.

Under Perkins III, the term voc ational and tec hnical educationrefers to school-based, career-specific workforce educationprograms : coherent sequences of courses, offered a t thesec ondary, postsec ondary, or adult levels, de signed to d evelop the a c ad em ic and wo rkplac e skills sp ec ific t o a pa rticular oc c upa tion or c areer cluster req uiring less tha n a b ac c a - laurea te d egree . In many States, including DC, the termvocational education has generally been replaced over thelast several years by career and technical education, careerand tec hnology education, or simply career-technicaleducation abbreviated as CTE or career-tech .

At the sec ondary level, career-tech programs are sometimesconfused with a variety of other offerings linked to thepractical arts tradition in education: broad career exploration programs (ca reer education); nonoccupational family and consumer sciences programs

(home economics); technology education programs (industrial arts); and, applied academics (education through occupations). C

T E T O D A Y & T O M O R R O WA


11/76

11

Under earlier reauthorizations of Federal vocational-technicallegislation, many programs and activities falling under thoseheadings were potentially eligible for Federal support, but thatis not the case with funds appropriated for CTE under Perkins III.

Until rec ently, sec ondary ca reer-technical education wasdivided into two basic categories: occupational preparation programs, designed to preparestudents for immediate labor market entry, into occupa tionsthat dont require postsecondary education as a prerequisite;and, technical preparation programs (Tech-Prep or 2+2),designed to prepare students for enrollment into a n assoc iatedegree, certificate, or apprenticeship program (at acommunity or tec hnical college), en route to a tec hnicalcareer.

But since the passage of first the STWOA and then Perkins III,Federal policy has assumed that a ll students should beprepared for both postsecondary education a nd careers. Inpractice, occupational prep and technical prep have beenconverging . In a growing number of States and localities, againincluding DC, CTE p rog ra ms ha ve b eg un rising to me et the sta nd a rds se t b y Tec h-Prep .

From a statutory standpoint, two separate funding streams areauthorized under Perkins III: Ba sic G rant s to Sta te s under Title I,8, and Tec h-Prep Gran ts under Title II, 208.

But despite formal distinctions between the two fundingprograms (Basic State G rants are defined under CFDA No84.048 and Tec h-Prep Grants under CFDA No. 84.243), theactivities supported under each authorization have bec omeincreasingly difficult to differentiate. In rec ognition of this fac t,the House has proposed that Tech-Prep Grants be absorbedinto Basic State Grants in the c ourse of the comingreauthorization.

A complementary trend that is emerging in the District of Columbia a nd other States is the involvement of the career-tech community in preparing secondary students for entry intob o t h associate degree a nd baccalaureate degree programs . Anumber of Statesagain including DChave establishedrigorous core academic requirements for all CTE programs thatsatisfy the minimum entry standards of four-year as well as two-year postsec ondary education programs. C

T E T O D A Y & T O M O R R O W


12/76

12

CTE programs in such States are typically categorized asCollege/ Tech-Prep pathways, and students who completesuch programs are identified as dual completers qualified toenter either an AAS degree program at a two-year communityor technical college, en route to a technical career, or a BS

degree program at a four-year college or university, en route toa professional career.

In addition, a growing number of Tech-Prep articulationagreements are being negotiated as open-ended, 2+2+2agreementssometimes referred to as Pro-Prep ( professionalpreparation ) a rticulationswhich prepare students to pursuebaccalaureate degrees and professional careers through associate degree programs and technical education.Moreover, an increasing number of C TE programs havebecome dual focus programs that simultaneously prepare

students to pursue either technical or professional careers in thesame c areer area or industrial sec tor.

As an overall category, these emerging pre-bac calaureatecareer-tech programs are sometimes ca tegorized asProfessional-Technical Education ( PTE or Pro-Tech ). TheSenate proposal for Perkins reauthorization extends explicitformal sanction to these program variants by removing thelanguage in 29 that limits CTE to preparation for occupationsthat require less than a baccalaureate degree as a prerequisitefor entry. In effec t, it institutionalizes Pro-Tec h.

Underlying Perkins III, three basic themes can be identified:

Regardless of career objectives, a ll stud ents mu st ma ster the universa l, co mm on c ore know led ge an d skills ac ad emic, career, and life co mpe tencies required forsuccess and self-sufficiency in a global economy;

All stud ent s should enroll in a nd suc c essfully c om p lete (without rem ed ia tion) at lea st one yea r of p ostsec ond a ry education , and be prepared for further education ortraining and lifelong learning;

All stud ents should b e p rep ared for high p erforma nc e,high produc tivity emp loyment (in high skills, high wagesec tors of a high technology economy) and for open-ended educational and career advancement. C



13/76

13

Specific statutory objectives for the use of Perkins III resourcesinclude the following (c itations are representative, not exhaustive):

1. Ensuring that all career-tech students master State-established academic and skill standards, enroll in and

complete postsec ondary education (without the need of remediation), and make a successful entry into a high skills, highwage career [113(b)(2)(A)];

2. Affording equal, nondiscriminatory access to a full range of qua lity CTE programs for individua ls who are members of special populations, and providing the services and supportsneeded to ensure their success in those programs [122(c)(8)];

3. Fostering career-tech programs that prepare women fornontraditional training and employment in current and

emerging high skills, high wage sec tors [134(b)(9)];

4. Developing, increasing, and expanding the use of state-of-the-art tec hnology in CTE, and increasing ac cess for CTEstudents to high tec h, high growth industries [124(b)(2)];

5. Providing comprehensive professional developmentprograms for CTE teachers, designed to ensure they stay c urrentwith industry standards and are prepared for Perkins IIIaccountability requirements [135(b)(4)];

6. Supporting high quality career-tech and career guidanceprograms for individuals incarcerated in State correctionalinstitutions, including women and young people [122(c)(18)];

7. Fostering partnerships to support high achievement by CTEstudentsamong sec ondary, postsec ondary, and adulteducation; school-to-work programs; employers and unions;pa rents and students; elected officials; and members of thecommunity at large [ 124(b)(6)].

Overall, CTE under the Perkins Act serves as a c ritic a l nexus of ed uca tion a nd the e c onom y in the 21st c entury . At one andthe same time, it represents: the career-specific component of high performance public

education; the school-based, first-chance arm of high-skills workforce

development; and, the competency-based, education engine of high wage

economic development. C T E T O D A Y & T O M O R R O W


14/76

14

Career-Technical EducationNexus

of Educational Reform& Economic Development

21ST CENTURY SKILLSFOR 21ST CENTURY CAREERS

Hig h Wa g eEc o no m ic

De ve lo p m e nt

HighPe rfo rm a nc e

Ed uc a tio n

High SkillsWorkforce

De ve lo p m e nt

C TE

C T E T O D A Y & T O M O R R O W


15/76

15

Despite the seeming clarity of C TEs role under theprovisions of the Perkins Act, the inherent diversity of career-tech education as an enterprise, in a country

which has no formal or coherent national workforcedevelopment system, is compounded by an even greater

diversity of perceptions of its basic mission and role.

The ranks of both advocates and detrac tors of CTE includemany, for example, who understand voc ed at thesec ondary level as first and foremost a form of work-formattedspecial education as a supportive a rena for basic skillsdevelopment and transition assistance for cognitively disabledstudents.

Another widespread vision of sec ondary CTE is that of acontextual alternative education (and dropout prevention or

rec overy) program, a lea rning environment for students who toone degree or another are a t risk or alienated frommainstream school structure.

This is one way of charac terizing the highly succ essful HighSchools That Work (HSTW) model, which was pioneered byGene Bottoms for the Southern Regional Education Board inAtlanta a nd has since attracted affiliates throughout much of the c ountry. The basic thrust of the HSTW approach is to useapplied lea rning in a sec ondary CTE format to ensure thatstudents defined as career bound meet rigorous coreac ademic standards.

Those who tend to see C TE as a form of special educationoften think in terms of a special work skills curriculum, focusedon sheltered work or supported work environments, withminimal ac ademic content. In contrast, those who tend toview CTE as a form of alternative education emphasizeuniversal academic standards, sometimes de-emphasizing oreven excluding c areer-specific skill development.

What unites these approa ches is the fact that assumptionsabout the inherent abilities of their target student populationsfundamentally define their programs. What might be termedoc cupational special education is a program for studentsperceived to have limited c ognitive ability (the bottom 25%of the bell-shaped curve). Applied and c ontextual alternativeeducationoften referred to as Educ ation Through Occupationsis a program for contextual or hands-onlearners.

D

C T E T O D A Y & T O M O R R O W


16/76

16

In contrast to both those approaches, proponents of stillanother model of CTEwhat has been called The NewVocationa lismtypica lly position their vision as a program fora ll students: they rejec t organization of schools aroundteacher perceptions of student abilities or lea rning styles, but at

the same time, they a lso rejec t organization of the sec ondarycurriculum around labor market objectives. The NewVocationalism is often taken to mean deferral of all ca reer-specific skill development to the postsecondary levelwithsec ondary CTE reduced to broad, sector-independent careerpreparation , and integrated into all courses of study at thesec ondary level, regardless of c areer objec tives.

In contrast, the model of secondary CTE manifested in Perkins IIIneither makes assumptions about the ability or learning styles of CTE students nor purports to meet the needs of a ll students (only

the large majority). Both the stereotyp ic al Old Voc at iona lism (ma nual arts prog ram s d esigne d to t rain the Not Co lleg e Mate rial for entry into low wa ge, d ea d end job s) and the c areer- independ ent , skills-neutral version of New Vo c a tiona lism a re rea lly out side the fram e o f refe renc e o f Perkins III.

Under Perkins III [ 3(26) and 3(29)], a c areer tech programof study is defined in very demanding terms: a c oherent, nonduplicative, competency-based

sequence of courses, at: either the sec ondary or the postsec ondary level, or both; which integrates both core a nd higher order academics

AND career and workplace basics AND specificoc cupational/ technical skills; and,

incorporates work-based learning and entrepreneurship prepwhere feasible and appropriate [135(c)(3)]; and,

prepares students for further educa tion; and, leads to high-wage, high-skill employment, in: career fields that require less than a four-year degree a s

a prerequisite for entry, in: current or emerging employment sec tors.

CTE is not ability defined. To suggest that Career-Tec h is, say,the inverse of gifted and talented programming is no morevalid than arguing that College Prep is the inverse of compensatory education. Career-Techs core role is that of thefirst-chance, first-stage workforce development system for thenon-baccalaureate labor force. C



17/76

1 7

Models of Secondary Work-Related Educationin Relation to School & Curriculum Organization

Career Dimensionsof the Secondary Curriculum:

Career-Themed Instruction Career-Specific Programs

S c h o o

l O r g a n

i z a t i o n

& S t u

d e n

t G r o u p

i n g :

A b

i l i t y

-

A s p

i r a t i o n s -

B a

s e d

B a s e

d m m Career Preparation

(Education about Careers Assimilatedinto Mainstream Education;Broad Career Themes as a

Format for Mastery of Core Curricula)

Voc. Alternative Ed.(Education through OccupationsSegregated from Mainstream Ed.

Applied Academics as aMethodology for Mastery of

Core Curricula)

Career-Tech. Ed. (C(Education for Careers

with Mainstream EducCareer-Specific ContentValue-Added to M

Core Curricula

Voc. Special Ed(Preparation for Work

to Mainstream Educ aWork-Formatted Lea

Environment for MBasic Life & Work


18/76

18

ive years into the first century of the Third Millennium of the modern era, the schools of the Na tions Capitalindeed, of the nation as a wholestruggle with a chronic

crisis, a crisis whose roots lie deep in the century past.

Ceremonial gatherings were organized in 2003 to c om-memorate the 20th anniversary of the publication of A Nation At Risk an event in 1983 that helped launch the nationwideeducational reform movement, a movement todayinstitutionalized as NCLBthe No Child Left Behind Ac t of 2001. So much has changed since 1983, and yetso muchremains the same.

A virtual tsunami of reform efforts has washed back and forthacross the landscape of American educ ation. Few if any schoolsystems have been unaffec ted. Many are spending more on

education, despite drastic cuts imposed by the recurrentbudget crises of the last fifteen years. In general, teachers arebetter qualified and somewhat better paid than twenty yearsago. High school graduation requirements have beenstrengthened, sometimes dramatically.

And yet, for all our efforts, little tangible improvement can beconfidently demonstrated. Test scoresthe primary foc us of NCLBhave been rising in some States and c ommunities. Butno one is sure if the higher scores are a valid a nd meaningfulreflec tion of increased knowledge and skills, or just an a rtifac tof manipulations of the pool of tested students.

Nationwide, upwards of a third of our students drop out withoutrec eiving a high school diploma 9in DC, many estimates putthe dropout level at upwards of 50% and the testing regimenis driving dropout rates (in truth, pushout rates) upward in largepa rts of the country. Other students hang on for a diploma, butdrift through sec ondary education without any rea l sense of accomplishment and with poor prospects after graduation. Atthe postsec ondary level, enrollment levels are increasinglythrea tened by rising tuition a nd declining student aidwhileremediation rates remain high and completion rates low.

Overall, there remains a persistent perception that Americaneducation is failing both our youth and our future. Researchsuggests that the violence and substance abuse that seemendemic in many schools are in key respects a labor market problem: dea d-end c hoices made bec ause no believablefuture is visible on the life horizons of young people.

D C S C H O I C E

F


19/76

19

nner-city children are the coa l mine c anaries of 21st centuryAmerica. Their crisis, and the overall crisis of Americaneducation, is a not-too-distant early warning of a larger

crisis in the American economy and American society as awhole: outside of the schools, our standard of living a nd quality

of life a re in serious and growing jeopa rdy.

Tec hnological wizardry has brought wondrous changes to thelook and feel of everyday life: personal computers, DVDs, cellphones, digital cameras, the Webthe list of marvels seemsendless and endlessly amazing. But meanwhile, as formerSecretary of Labor Robert Reich and others have emphasized,the real wages of American workers peaked in 1972-73 around the time that President Nixon imposed temporary wagecontrolsand have since fa llen back to the levels of the 1950s.

Family income has so far avoided a fully proportionate fallinstead remaining more or less stagnant near the levels of themiddle 1970sbut only bec ause of the wholesale entry of women into the labor force. Today, the average family needstwo working spouses to support roughly the same standard of living sec ured by a single breadwinner a generation ago.

Today, what the U.S. Education Department refers to informallyas a family supporting wa ge rea lly means 50% of the totalincome required to support an American family in minimumcomfort and security.

Five years after the dot.com bubble burst, the stoc k marketappears to have resumed the c limb that bec ame the lietmotif of the 1990s. But no corresponding recovery for jobs andincomes seems in the offing. New job crea tion has finally begunto outpace losses, but the jobs being c reated a re typically atlower income levels than the ones disappearing.

Concessionary ba rgaining and the dec line of labor unions ingeneral are only one symptom of the Wal*Marting of theworld economy. High-paying jobs are fleeing, not just from theNorth and the East to the South and the West, as in earlierdecades, but from the U.S. to Mexico, Taiwan, Korea, China,Indiaand eve n from higher-inc om e reg ions within tho se c ountries to low er where they are reborn as low-wage jobs.

As income inequality in America reaches levels unknown inmodern times, the middle c lass is shrinking and poverty isincreasing. Not just American education, but the AmericanDream itself is on the threshold of crisis.

D C S C H O I C E

I


20/76

20

hile hardly promising a panac ea, a growing bodyof resea rch and practice suggests strongly thatraising the educational and skill levels of the

workforce represents one key strategy for resolving the dualcrisis of American education and the American Dream.

It is a commonplac e to c omplain that internationalcompetition bears much of the responsibility for falling rea lwages. Media attention has highlighted specific industrialsec tors that have failed to compete effec tively, such assteel. But, as the Americ a s Choice report pointed out, theproblem has never been that American business in generalhas been losing the global competitive struggle.

Rather, Americ a s Choice argued convincingly that the fallin rea l wages in the United States has in part been a

manifestation of a tendency of American business to meetgrowing international competition by adopting a low-wage strategy : using out-sourcing, off-shoring, downsizing, takeba cks, union decertifica tion, plant closures, and part-timeand part-year employment to drive wa ges down toward

Third World levels.

As an alternative to lo w e r w a g e s , Americ a s Choice propo sed high skil ls : a strategy based on l ea rning to work be tter and sma rter, not c hea pe r : a high performance, high quality, hightechnology, high value-added, high wage strategy .

The basic thesis of Americ a s Choice is that education canfoster a high wage business strategy by creating a new typeof workforce : a high skills, high productivity workforce that isready, wiling, and able to staff high p erformanc e w ork organizations to engage in globa l competition based onqua lity, innova tion, and flexibilitybased on inc rea sing value , rather than simply c utting c osts .

The economy of the future is a new technology ec onomy . Today, virtually every dimension of the human experienceagriculture a nd manufacturing, c ommunications andtransportation, energy and the environment, housing andcommunity development, art and entertainment, politics andculture, family life and educ ation, health care and warfareisundergoing or on the threshold of a profound transformationwrought by scientific and technological change. By mid-century, the very nature of human life may have evolved wellbeyond our present imagining.

D C S C H O I C E

W


21/76

21

In the long run, the dot-com bust of 2000 and the terrorism crisisthat began in 2001 will only ac celerate real innovation, notretard it. High tech, high skills, high performance, high value-added work organizations can serve as a foundation forgeneral prosperity for the America of the 21st century

Already, the technical workforce is fast emerging as thedynamic core of this new tec hnology ec onomy. Tec hnicians,tec hnologists, journey workers, and other high skills workers(with associate degrees, diplomas, certificates, and other skillcredentials) represent the center of gravity of the 21st Centurylabor market upwards of 40% of the workforce, a lmost twicethe percentage of professional workers with four-year degreesor higher.

The recurrent perception of a national skills crisis in the United

States is a very concrete and immediate manifestation of thelong-term shift toward the tec hnician/technologist sec tor of the labor market. The various strategies that business leadersand politicians have put forward for addressing the nationalshortage of IT (information tec hnologyi.e., software)workers attracted considerable publicity in the past severalyears. Less well known, but equally acute, is the worseningshortage of ET (elec tronic technologyi.e., hardware)workers. Industry estimates projec t an annual shortfall of almostone million workers if current trends persist.

A broa d range of other high skills sec tors, from prec ision metalsto c onstruction to health care to manufac turing tobiotec hnology, are sounding similar alarms in many parts of thecountryall this at a time when, as noted ea rlier, persistentunderemployment has reached an historic high of 43% amongbaccalaureate degree holders as a whole and 67% amongliberal arts majors.

areer-technical education is the training of choice forthe new high skills, high wage, technical sec tor.Sec ondary and postsec ondary CTE eac h have

critica l, and c omplementary, roles to play.

At the postsec ondary level, community and technical collegesare a first line of defense in efforts to overcome the nationalskills crisis, a first line of offense in the struggle for a world-classworkforce . Flexible, adaptable, and customer-driven, withstrong ties to business and industry, community colleges are apillar of the national workforce development system.

D C S C H O I C E

C


22/76

22

D C S C H O I C E

As Anthony Carnevale and Donna Desroc hers put it, technicaland c ommunity colleges are gradually emerging as theprototypical lea rning institutions for the new economy. 10

Thomas R. Bailey and Irina E. Averianova of the CommunityCollege Research Center (CCRC) at Columbia University make

exac tly the same c ase: A growing number of policy makersand business leaders look to occupational education at thecommunity college as a key site for building the workforce forthe next century. 11

Recent resea rch by Norton Grubb at the University of Californiaat Berkeley has underscored the fact that technical andcommunity colleges, by c rea ting pools of high skills workers incommunities eager for high performance business growth, canserve as powerful engines of ec onomic development. 12

In making growth and development dec isions, Grubb argues,business leaders and entrepreneurs typica lly expect to recruitfor tec hnologists, tec hnicians, and other high skills workerswithin a forty-mile radius of their existing or proposed facility. Atthe same time, they assume that four-year degree holders caneasily be recruited from a national pool. Thus, regionalconcentrations of four-year degree holders are not a factor inbusiness decisionsbut concentrations of technically-trainedworkers appear as targets of opportunity, as Great Attractors of Economic Growth .

At the same time, sec ondary CTEin the form of Tec h-Prepand C ollege/Tec h-Prep programs of studyis repositioningitself as a powerful feeder system for postsecondary CTE .

The high school diploma or GED is no longer an end in itself,but the doorway to postsec ondary education. As the report of the Nationa l Commission on the High School Senior Year(Ra ising Our Sights: No High Sc ho ol Senio r Left Behind )concluded, In the emerging 21st century, all Americans willrequire two additional yea rs of formal education a nd trainingat some point after they leave high school.

It is quite true, as J ames Rosenbaum (among others) hasargued, that the labor market of the immediate presentemploys as many unskilled and semiskilled workers as skilledand highly skilled (each sec tor represents upwards of 40% of the total labor market). In fac t, upwards of 20% of a ll currentemployment is made up of occupations that dont evenrequire a high school diploma as a prerequisite. 13


23/76

23

But the low skills sector of the labor market is overwhelminglydominated by part-time, part-year, minimum wageemploymentjobs that offer poor working conditions, nobenefits, and no job sec urity. For success and self-suffic iency inthe 21st century global economyfor breadwinner

employmenteducation and training beyond high school hasbecome, for all practical purposes, a universal prerequisite. 14

o open the door to postsec ondary education, universalhigh achievement must become the standard insecondary education . All students must master the

common core skills and knowledge of a global economy:reading, writing, and communications; mathematics andproblem-solving; scientific understanding and reasoning; familylife, c ivic life, and workplac e skills.

Recent reports by the National Assoc iation of Ma nufacturers(NAM), in addition to raising the alarm about the shortage of machinists and other precision manufac turing workers, havereemphasized chronic c onc erns among employers andpostsec ondary educators alike about serious deficienc ies inreading, writing, mathematics, and other basic skills exhibitedby rec ent high school graduates. 15

Until now, very different expectations have been pervasive forstudents perceived as the College Bound and studentsdefined as Not College Material. There has been a yawninggap in academic ac hievementan Achievement Gapnotbetween vocational students and regular students, assometimes implied, but between all students defined as NotCollege Material (whether enrolled in career-tech programs ornot) and those students identified as College Bound.

To close this Ac hievement Gap, schools must abandon ability-based segregationmust outlaw the stereotyping of childrenas Not College Material. As Raising Our Sights recommended,State a nd Federal policy should prohibit practices that havethe explic it or unintended c onsequence of categorizingstudents into groups so that offering them a watered-downcurriculum can more readily be justified. 16

Ability stereotyping must be eradicated at every level. Allavailable data indicates that when we create an expectationof failure, student achievement generally falls to the levels weexpect. If we truly expect all students to succeed, they willgenerally exceed our expectations .

D C S C H O I C E

T


24/76

24

The Achievement Gap is sometimes attributed to career-tec heducation itself. But both national and State and local dataindicate strongly that the G ap has deep roots in Americanschools, trac ing ba ck to grade four and below. C areer-tec hprograms, in contrast, rarely begin until grade 11they cant

be the source of the problem.

Rather, as Ivan Charner and Robin Whites rec ent research forthe National Center for Research in Career and Tec hnicalEducation has once again attested, quality career-techprograms at the secondary level [particularly those in shared-time regional technical centers, but even many in largercomprehensive high schools] have always incorporated therelated (often higher order) academics needed for successfulperformanc e in a high skills oc cupation. 17

Many States and localities have successfully responded to thePerkins requirements for ac ademic integration simply bysystematica lly mapping or inventorying the embeddedac ademic content of ongoing career-tec h courses.

eyond reinforcing a cademic ac hievement, however,and powerfully promoting high school retention a ndgraduation, CTE at the sec ondary level plays the role of

jum p sta rting the a c q uisitio n o f the c a ree r-sp ec ific kno wled g e a nd skills tha t w ill co ntinue a t the p ostsec ond a ry leve l .

There is no biological or soc iologica l rule that says career-specific skill development must be postponed arbitrarily until ahigh school diploma is ea rned or the age of 18 is reached. Onthe contrary, the line be twe en sec ond ary and po stsec ond ary CTE is b ec om ing inc rea singly b lurred in sc hools a nd c om munity c olleg es around the na tion .

A whole series of secondary/postsecondary linkage initiatives(loosely grouped under the heading of AcceleratedTransitions to Postsecondary Education ) are being pilot testedand pioneered in many communities: not just advanc ed Tec h-Prep articulation agreements that award transcriptedpostsec ondary credit to high school CTE program completers,but also dual enrollment and simultaneous completionagreements, c ommunity college satellites within Early CollegeHigh Schools , Middle Colleges and Tech-Prep High Schoolslocated on c ommunity college c ampuses, CTE courses taughtby community college faculty, and AAS programs offered atsec ondary CTE centers. 18

D C S C H O I C E

B


25/76

25

Moreover, as research by Paul Harrington and his colleagueshas doc umented (at the C enter for Labor Market Studies atNortheastern University in Boston), career-specific occupationaland technical skill development reaps substantial rewards inthe labor market at eve ry educational level from high school

through doc toral degrees.19

Unfortunately, the c a p ab ility of individ ua l hig h sc hoo ls,c olleg es, c om munities a nd Sta tes to o ffer a d va nc ed sec ond ary c a ree r-tec h p rog ra ms of stud y va ries wide ly ac ross the c ountry .

The latest NAVE report (the 2004 National Assessment of Voc ational Education, 20 mandated under 114(c)(3) of PerkinsIII) surprised many by highlighting the continuing high numbersof students who partic ipate in CTE courses at the sec ondary

level and even enroll in and c omplete CTE programs of study.Over 90% of high schools in the U.S. are identified ascomprehensive; they offer students at lea st one coursewhich they identify as voc ationa l, and over 90% of theirstudents take at lea st one such course.

But many of the vocational courses at c omprehensive highschools are actually focused on basic workplace or life skills(keyboarding, technology education, family and consumereducation, general business or agriculture, or shop). Only 75%of high schools offer even one c oherent sequence of coursesthat meets the demanding Perkins Act criteria for a C TEprogram, and many of the nominal CTE programs that areoffered by c omprehensive high schools are in fact quite basicor general. Only a relative handful of comprehensive highschools offer a broad range of quality, higher level programs;according to a 1993 OVAE study, fewer than 5% support morethan six distinct programs.

On the other hand, most States also support area skilldevelopment centers, which do in fac t offer a broad range of advanced, high quality career-tech programs to high schoolstudents (and adults), on a regional basis.

According to a recent study by Richard Lynch of the Universityof Georgia, 21 approximately 1,100 area career-tech centers arein operation around the c ountry; each ac cepts students fromall the sending high schools in a service region, on a shared-time basis. In addition, there are also roughly 250 full-time,diploma-granting, regional CTE high schools.

D C S C H O I C E


26/76

26

In Maine, for example, a State which conc entrates allsec ondary CTE in regional career-tec h centers, fully seventydifferent programs are offered among 26 centers, ranging fromaquaculture to prec ision manufacturing to computernetworking to entrepreneurship, from law enforcement to

multimedia to biotechnology to pre-health studies.

Ma ny of Ma ines sec ondary CTE programs compare favorablyin tec hnical rigor to the state-of-the-art assoc iate degreeofferings of the Maine Community College System-a factwhich has sometimes made secondary-postsec ondaryarticulation agreements more difficult, rather than easier.

Similarly, Californias statewide network of RegionalOccupational Centers (ROC s) not only operates advancedarea workforce educ ation centers, it also outplaces selec ted

high level regional career tec h programs into largecomprehensive high schools.

One of the p a inful pa ra d oxes of the evo lution of C TE in the 1990s wa s a trend in som e Sta te s a wa y from reg iona lized CTE d elivery system s like a rea c a ree r-tec h c ente rs , despitesubstantial evidence that the ec onomies of scale offered byregional centers (with respect to both resources and students)make implementing a broad range of advanced and hightech programs of study much more a ffordable.

in fac t represents a worst-case scenario (aproverbial poster child) for the dissolution of area CTE centers and the devolution of both

secondary and postsecondary career-tech programming ingeneral.

Barely a decade ago, the students and employers of theDistrict of Columbia enjoyed a sec ondary career/vocational/technical education system that compared very favorably withadvanced workforce educa tion programs in Oklahoma,Ma ine, Delaware, Massachusetts, and other CTE strongholdsthroughout the nation.

Although repeated data housec leanings (at both the Federaland District levels) have erased most detailed rec ords of DCvocational education in the 20th century, enoughdocumentation remains to paint a vivid picture of how muchthe young people a nd the economy of the District have lost in

just the last few years. 21 D C S C H O I C E

DC


27/76

27

As rec ently as the 1992-1993 school yea r, for example, DCPSinvested nearly $22 million in State/ loc al 1992 dollars directly inCTE. The ratio of District support to Federal support wasapproximately 5-to-1. In contrast, the total 2004 resource basefor C TE in DC just slightly exceeded $5 million in 2004 dollars, of

which barely $485,000 represented State/local dollarsaDistrict-to-Federal ratio of approximately 1-to-10 .

(For comparison, the State of Maine, whose school yea r 2003-2004 Carl D. Perkins Basic State G rant was less than $6 million,appropriated over $15 million for secondary CTE. Illinois invested$31 million State dollars during that same year. Oklahoma, witha Perkins grant of only $17 million, committed almost $125million. See next page for da ta on additiona l States.)

In 1990-91, approximately 3,000 DCPS students were identified as

enrolled in voc ational educ ation programs of study, andenrollment was projec ted to increase by 5% per year. 23 In contrast,for the 2004 school year no standard CTE student count existed,and (given c ertain assumptions) less than 75 CTE concentratorscould be identified for Federal reporting purposes. 24

In the 1990s, DCPS supported a citywide network of sevenregional CTE centers (termed career-focused high schools andvocational centers), ac hieving the concentrations of resourcesand students needed to support high level tec hnical educationprograms. Program development was proceeding in cuttingedge career areas such a s emergency medical technology,paralegal technology, law enforcement, and veterinarytechnology.

By the 2003-04 program year, all but one c enter had been shutdown, their programs dispersedand in large part dissipatedamong c omprehensive high schools around the city. Under-maintained for yea rs, the last remaining career high school, M.M.Washington, is slated to lose that status at the end of this year.

At one time, entrepreneurship preparation and work-basedlearning pervaded CTE programming. DC PS student-runenterprises included a restaurant in Adams-Morgan, adowntown department store, and an auto reconditioningcenter and used car dealership. Today, no trac e of theseexemplary learning opportunities remains. For so many of ourstudents and neighborhoods, DCs choice is starkly posed: highskills or low wages. A 21st century CTE system must be rebuiltand reinvented to secure our future prosperity.

D C S C H O I C E


28/76

28

S T A T E C T E F U N D

S P Y 0 5 State Appropriations for Secondary

Career-Technical Education, PY 2005

STATE SECONDARY CTE FUNDS

Alabama $177,529,091Arizona 11,185,400Arkansas 14,778,683Colorado 19,959,556District of Columbia 535,000Georgia 188,168,106Idaho 7,929,340

Illinois 31,000,000Iowa 2,936,904Kentucky 41,625,181Maine 15,2000,000Michigan 29,000,000Minnesota 109,100,000Missouri 31,363,935Montana 715,000Nebraska 730,050Nevada 362,620New Hampshire 16,012,074New Jersey 3,107,472New Mexico 3,569,202North Dakota 6,800,000Oklahoma 123,887,358Pennsylvania 45,000,000South Carolina 12,767,549Tennessee 118,146,927Texas 695,742,065

Utah 97,555,445Virginia 30,569,167West Virginia 8,870,317Wyoming 648,792

Source: National Assoc iation of State Direc tors of C areer- Technical Education Consortium Listserv Survey, February, 2005


29/76

29

n the spring of 2002, the appointment of Dr. Arthur L. Curryas State Direc tor of C areer and Tec hnical Educationmarked a new beginning for CTE in DCPS. OC TE has been

charged with both renewing C TE and helping spearhead thereform of public high schools throughout the District. The core

strategy proposed for both efforts involves restructuring thesec ondary curriculum around clearly defined PostsecondaryGateways , Career Academies , and Program Majors .

The defining themes and elements of a Gateway Agenda forhigh school reinvention and career-tec h renewalfor thecreation of a comprehensive, ac celerated School-To-College-and-Careers Transition System include the following:

1. Universal High Performance Education

In the global economy of the 21st Century, all students shouldbe prepared for postsecondary education. 25 For the first three-quarters of the 20th Century, rising real wages brought amiddle-class life style within reach of Americans with no moreformal education than a high school diploma. But rea l wageshave been dec lining or stagnant since 1973. Today, in thewords of Anthony Carnevale of the Educationa l Testing Service,economic restructuring has made postsec ondary educationor training the threshold requirement for good jobs. Ac cordingto U.S. Census Data, young high school gradua tes ea rn barely$2,000 per year more than high school dropouts. In contrast,assoc iate degree holders ea rn $6,000 per year more than highschool graduates, and baccalaureate degree recipients earnalmost $20,000 more. The minimum premium for postsec ondaryeducation is 62% 26. The U.S. Department of Education hasidentified a two-year postsec ondary degree or certificate asthe minimum credential for a family-supporting c areer. 27

The characteristic ec onomic mode of the 20th century waslong run, commodity, mass productiona n assembly lineenvironment that demanded little in the way of academic skillsand required high tolerance for boredom and regimentation.But todays economy needs a highly educated, highly skilledworkforceliterate, engaged, self-motivated and self-disciplined, flexible, a daptive, inventive, skilled at problemsolving. Not only are postsec ondary credentials a threshold tocareers in high-tec h sec tors, but studies have a lso shown thatbeing able to read well, communicate effectively, and usemathematical and scientific reasoning has bec ome essentialfor entry and success at virtually every level of the labor market.

G A T E W A Y A G E N D AI


30/76

30

If we fail to ensure that all our students can read, write, andcompute at world-standard levels, we are dooming them to alife at the economic margins.

A prerequisite to preparing all students for both postsec ondary

education and c areers must be the a bolition of ability-basedtracking 28the segregation of our students, from kindergartenon, into the C ollege Bound and the Not C ollege Material.

The near-exclusive foc us of American education since the 1950son the best and the brightest led to the creation of a sec ond-tier, sec ond-rate ac ademic curriculum: the General Course of Study, a wa tered down, dumbed down caricature of traditional liberal arts offerings that failed to prepare students foreither college, careers, or life.

In many communities (including DC at one time), quality

vocational and c areer-tec hnical educa tion programs havecontinued to offer students rigorous, career-specific knowledgeand skill development. But CTE programs typically representonly four credits out of 24 required for high school gradua tion.

They can hardly substitute for the equally rigorous ac ademicknowledge that has been denied the Not College Material.Worse, the emphasis on programs for the College Bound hasgradually eroded CTE in many Statesagain including DC .

The overwhelming majority of students (over 97% in recentsurveys) realize that postsecondary education has become aprerequisite to self-sufficiency and prosperity in contemporaryAmerica. But only a small minority are ac tually prepared forsuccess at the postsecondary level. Ac cording to the NationalCenter for Education Statistics, less than 2/3rds of high schoolstudents complete the minimum coursework required forpostsec ondary education at the assoc iate degree level (4credits in English, 3 each in Math, Science, and Soc ial Studiesthe New Basics). Less than 30% meet the typical entrancerequirements for four-year college programs (the same 13credits plus two c redits in a foreign language).

Upwards of 50% of low-income and minority students nevercomplete high school; many never even try. Barely 2/3rds of high school gradua tes ever enroll in college. Of those, less thanhalf earn a degree or certificate; required in great numbers totake noncredit, remedial courses, many never even enter adegree program. Of those who do attain a credential (onaverage, less than one in four; in many communities, ba rely onein six), a growing number are saddled with crushing debt.

G A T E W A Y A G E N D A


31/76

31

This is a formula for widespread poverty, struggling families,declining c ommunities, income inequality, and ec onomicstagnation. In place of tracking, we must establish universalhigh performance education . Instead of stigmatizing themajority of students as predestined to failure, we must

internalize an expectation that all our students will succeed,and provide all the support necessary to ensure that they do .29

2. World Class Learning Standards

The foundation of a universal high performance educationsystem must be tested, proven, world-class standards of learning: objec tive, reality-ba sed statements of the essentialknowledge and skills students must master to pass through thegateways to success in postsecondary education and 21stcentury ca reers.

Keyed direc tly to those real world, world-class standardsmust be an authentic, performance-based accountabilitysystem : valid and reliable assessments of student, teacher, andschool achievement.

Keyed direc tly to those authentic assessments must be corecurriculum frameworks for all educational levels and everycontent area , and research-based, nationally-validatedinstructional strategies , ada ptable and scalable to meet theneeds of various sizes and types of schools and different studentpopulations.

Other essential elements include: a dynamic professionaldevelopment system, aligned with the core curriculum andinstructional strategies ; supplementary educational services , tomeet the unique and specific needs of both high performingand struggling students; and, prevention and interventionprograms , to provide support and backup to anyone at-risk of failing to meet standards or dropping out of school.

3. Comprehensive, K-Adult Career Development System

To empower students to make meaningful educational,career, and life choicesto take advantage of theopportunities and rise to the c hallenges of a universal highperformance educational systema comprehensive, K-adult,career awareness, exploration, decisionmaking, and guidanceand counseling system must be put in place in every school ,featuring the internationally tested and proven Rea l Ga me .



32/76

32

4. Individualized Education/Graduation/Career Plans for All

A centerpiece of the DCPS Comprehensive CareerDevelopment System must be the development of anindividual education/graduation/career plan ( Individual

Opportunity Plan IOP or Individual Graduation Plan) foreach studenta plan that sets forth a clearly defined andrea listic pa th through high school into postsec ondaryeducation and the labor market. Each students plan should bedeveloped by the end of the 8th grade, and revisited by theend of the 10th, as well as at other times as needed.

5. IOP Planning Templates: Gateways to College and Careers

As a framework for the development of IOPs, studentsshould be offered up to four Postsecondary Gateways

college and careers planning templates :

a. College/Tech-Prep (CTE-Dual Path , or Career-Tech ), toserve students heading for either tec hnical or professionalcareers;

b. Professional-Technical Prep (CTE-B.S. , or Pro-Tech ), toserve students foc used exclusively on professional careers;

c. Liberal Studies (Pre-B.A. ), to serve students explicitlycommitted to a c lassic liberal arts curriculum; and,

d. International Baccalaureate (IB), to serve students headedfor professional careers through IB, an internationallystandardized liberal arts program.

Eac h Gateway would subsume one or more coherentprograms of study , or Program Majors : organized sequencesof courses leading to defined educa tional and c areerobjectives.

Student dec isions about which Gateway template andProgram Major to use as a ba sis for the development of theirIOP should be based upon their educational and c areerobjectives, not teacher, parent, or personal perceptions of theirinherent ability or learning style. IOPs should be plannedbackward from a desired point of entry into the labor market ; toplan forward from stereotypes about student abilities is a formof tracking, prejudicial to equality of opportunity and aviolation of civil rights.



33/76

33

Out of a possible 28 Carnegie Units (CUs)assuming fouryears of study at the secondary level and a seven-periodschool da yfully 22.5 should be a lloc ated to a universal corecurriculum common to all four Gateways. Unique to eac hGateway would be career or theme-specific course sequences

totalling 4.5 CUs . In addition, one CU would be available for apure elective .

DCPS already has adopted total minimum credit requirementsfor gradua tion that equa l or exceed those of many States. But agrowing body of research [for a summary, see Rea dy or Not; Crea ting a High Sc hoo l Diploma tha t Co unts, The AmericanDiploma Projec t, 2004] has made it clear that opening the doorsto college a nd c areers for all will demand c ourse requirementsand achievement standards, not just sea t time.

To begin with, a rigorous, 4x4 academic curriculumshould constitute the foundation of every program of study in every Gateway4 CUs each in:

a. English Language Arts (I, II, III, and IV);

b. Math : Algebra I; Geometry; Algebra II; and,

Trigonometry or Calculus;c. Science : Biology; Chemistry; Physics; and, Environmental Science; and,

d. Social Studies : U.S. History; World History;

U.S. and DC Government; and Geography and Economics (.5 CUs each).

As detailed in a just completed analysis by Achieve, Inc. ( TheExpectations Gap, A 50-State Review of High SchoolGradua tion Requirements), this level of rigor would wellexceed existing minimum gradua tion requirements in all but ahandful of States.



34/76

34

A large majority of States do require students to successfullycomplete a t least four courses in English Language Arts,although the content of those c ourses is rarely specified orstandardized. But only five States currently require four mathcredits for high school gradua tion. Twenty-two fail to specify

which math courses are necessary, and an additional nine(including DC at the present time) specify only Algebra I. Onlythree States require Algebra I, Geometry, and Algebra II.

Moreover, only one State currently requires four physica lscience c redits for gradua tion. Almost half (including DC at thepresent time) fail to specify which scienc e c ourses are required,and most of those who do spec ify only Biology and GeneralScience.

Similarly, the New Basics core curriculum model that

emerged from the first round of high school reforms in the1980sthe standard adopted by the succ essful High Schools

That Work whole school reform programdemands four creditsin English language Arts, but only 3 each in Math, Science, andSoc ial Studies.

But the reality is that graduation requirements have become alagging indicator. They have institutionalized the perfor-manceexpectations and labor market demands of an earlier era .

To make matters worse, almost twenty States still support a two-tiered (or more) secondary curriculum: one set of requirementsand expectations for the C ollege Bound, another less rigorous,sec ond-class set for the Not C ollege Material.

In contrast, the 4x4 universal core c urriculum and course andsequenc e requirements represent an intentionally leadingedge modeldesigned to prepare the overwhelming majorityof students (with the sole exception of students with the mostsignificant cognitive disabilities) for both postsec ondaryeducation and c areers.

A strong, often compelling rationale exists for each course andsequence requirement. Algebra II, for a notable example, iswidely rec ognized as a c ritical gatekeeper to bothpostsecondary education and high skill careers; 30 Algebra IIcompleters are three times more likely to ea rn four-yeardegrees than students who complete only Algebra I andgeometry. Calculus-taking is a similar predictor of postsec ondary success. 31



35/76

35

The science sequence of biology, chemistry, and physics is aformal requirement of the U.S. Department of Educ ations StateScholars Initiative (SSI) ac ademic rec ognition and scholarshipprogram. The C enter for State Scholars (CSS) which administersSSIand includes a bibliography of research on academic and

graduation requirements on its website (cf. http://www.centerforstatescholars.org/scholars_course_of_study.php )also requires 3.5 credits in social studies, including economics.

In addition to the universal core academic requirements, allfour Ga teways should a lso expect students to earn 6.5 CUs inuniversal supplementary academic areas :

a. 2 CUs in a World Language ;

b. 1 CU each in Art and Music ;

c. .5 CUs each in introductory and advanced ComputerApplications ; and,

d. 1.5 CUs in Health and Physical Education .

Altogether, the universal core and supplementaryacademic requirements, common to all four Gateways , wouldrepresent 22.5 CUs , and ensure that all Gateway program majorcompleters meet the minimum entry requirements of postsecondary education .

In fact, all Gateway completers would not only meet, butactually exceed, the challenging standards for State Scholarsset by the U.S. DOE and the C SS. Implementation of theproposed Gateway credit and course requirements would setthe stage for DC joining the nationwide State Scholars Initiativeas a new SSI State Partner, since all Gateway programcompleters would qualify for recognition as a District of Columbia State Scholar .

On the following page is a c hart of the proposed GatewayPlanning Templates which illustrates how those 22.5 CUs canbe earned and the course and sequence requirements be metover the c ourse of four years. Assuming that up to 28 CUs canbe ea rned eac h academic year, 4.5 CUs can be committed tosequential, career-specific preparation and still allow eachstudent to devote one Carnegie Unit to a purely electiveoffering . Alternately, students weak in a particular academicarea could alloc ate this time to ramp-up and remedialservices.



36/76

3 6

Gateway Planning Templates: 4 Paths to College & Careers

11th Grade

English IIIAlgebra IIPhysicsU.S. History

Health/Phys. Ed. (.5)

4.5

Elective (.5)

Career-Tech ICareer-Tech II

Pro-Tech IPro-Tech II

English Literature Junior Seminar

World Language III Theory of Knowledge

7

10th Grade

English IIGeometryChemistryWorld History

World Language IIMusicComputer Apps. (.5 CU)


7

7

9th Grade

English IAlgebra IBiologyDC History/Geography

World Language IArtComputer Apps. (.5 CU)


7

7

Gateway/Component

Core Academics (16 CUs)

Supplemen. Acad. (5)

Other (1.5)

Total Core CUs (22.5)

Elective (1 CU)

College/Tech Prep(CTE-Dual Path)(4.5 CUs)

Professional-TechnicalPrep (CTE-B.S.)(4.5 CUs)

Liberal Studies(Pre-B.A.)(4.5 CUs)

InternationalBaccalaureate(4.5 CUs)

Total CUs: 28


37/76

37

Each of the four proposed Gateway templates thusincorporates 4.5 CUs that are Gateway-specific uniquelyappropriate to the educational and labor market strategies andobjectives characteristic of each Gateway . The 22.5 universalCUs plus the 4.5 Gateway-specific CUs add up to a minimum

credit requirement for completion of a Program Major of 27CUs ; this level would be 3.5 CUs greater than the current DCgraduation requirement, but still one CU less than the nominalmaximum of 28.

In sum, all four Gateways represent ac ademically rigorous,content-rich, open-ended paths to college and careers: thesame 4x4 ac ademic core, the same supplementary andrelated academic requirements, the same graduationrequirements, only 4.5 CUs that a re pa thway-specific. Almost85% of the credit and course requirements are universal,

spanning all four Gateways.

Conceptually, two different CTE Gateways can be defined,although the differences would be transpa rent to students. Theexisting College/ Tech-Prep Gateway is made up of pre-technical programs of study, designed to prepare graduates toenter two-year, associate degree programs, en route to acareer in the technical sec tor of the labor market. Since allcompleters are equally prepared to enter four-year programs,College/Tec h-Prep represents what many States term a DualPath , equipping students to enter either AAS or BS programs.

Since a ll program majors should share a universal academiccore, all students who successfully complete College/Tech-Prep programs of study will also, as just noted, meet theminimum entry requirements of four-year college programs. Butin addition, open-ended 2+2+2 articulation agreementsshould be negotiated for all College/ Tech-Prep programs , sothat two-year program graduates retain the option of transferring into a four-year program at the junior year levelpursuing a baccalaureate degree and a professional careerthrough an assoc iate degree and a technical foundation.

Furthermore, certain CTE programs of study are Dual Focus they encompa ss both pre-technical and pre-professionalcontent , prepa ring students for either career objective a t thesame time. The Project Lead the Way (PLTW) curriculum, forexample, simultaneously prepares students to pursue careers ineither Engineering Tec hnology or Engineering Scienc ea seither engineering techs or professional engineers.



38/76

38

The Transportation Engineering (TRAC ) curriculum offers similardua l-foc us preparation, preparing students to enter careers inthe transportation industry in either c ivil engineering or civilengineering tec hnology.

Beyond Dual Path and Dual Foc us program majors, CTE-based programs of study could potentially be identified thatcould best be described as explicitly pre-professional : designedto prepare graduates to enter four-year, bac calaureate degreeprograms, en route to a career in the professional sec tor.

These program majors would be structurally identical to those of the College/Tech-Prep Gateway; both pre-technical and pre-professional Program Majors would incorporate both a sequenceof 4 high-level, career-specific, competency-based CTE coursesand the equivalent of at least .5 CUs of structured, high quality

work-based learning opportunities . But based on their distincteducational and labor market objectives, the pre-professionalprograms could be characterized as a separate G ateway,Professional-Technical Preparation ( Pro-Tech , or CTE-B.S. ).

However, Perkins III does not provide a clear mandate to offerpre-baccalaureate programming under a C TE umbrellaalthough the Senate has proposed to make such authorizationexplicit under Perkins IV. For the time being, OCTE has electednot to actively pursue this option, pending clarification of thestatutory environment during reauthorization.

Renewed career-technical education should meet thecareer goals of upwards of 80% of students. But to meet theneeds of parents who are averse to any form of career-relatedprogramming at the secondary level , either pre-technical orpre-professional, a Liberal Studies (Pre-B.A.) Gateway should beoffered to students who are fully committed to entering a four-year liberal arts program at a competitive private college oruniversity . In terms of course requirements, the Liberal StudiesGateway would simply substitute four liberal arts courses for thefour CTE CUs (English literature, philosophy, and junior and seniorseminars might be most appropriate, relative to theexpectations of c ollege admissions officers), and a .5 CU Senior

Thesis for the .5 CU internship.

In addition, highly motivated students should also haveaccess to the International Baccalaureate program, aninternationally-standardized liberal arts curriculum that opensdoors to many prestigious colleges and universities.



39/76

39

The 22.5 CU core and supplementary ac ademic requirementsproposed above for all CTE program majors would a lreadymeet most IB standards; to establish a distinct InternationalBaccalaureate Gateway , four unique IB offeringsTheory of Knowledge, Creativity, Ac tion, and Service, and two more

world language creditswould simply substitute for the fourcareer-tec h/pro-tec h CUs, while a .5 Senior Thesis substitutes forthe .5 Internship.

An additional, non-postsecondary Gateway OccupationalSpecial Education should be established to meet the needs of students the U.S. Department of Education c haracterizes asstudents with the most significant cognitive disabilities students who, as specified by valid, negotiated IndividualEducation Plans (IEPs):

a. are not candidates for mainstreaming into approved CTEprograms, even with substantial support;

b. are not preparing to graduate from high school (much lessenroll in an assoc iate degree or certificate program at thepostsec onda ry level); and,

c. are planning to make an initial entry into the labor marketvia a sheltered or supported employment environment.

Under the authority of the DCPS Office of Spec ial Education , notOCTE, and supported with funds made available under theIndividuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), not Perkins III,OSE programs would not meet minimum Perkins standards. Butthey would be employment-oriented and transition-focused,designed to ensure that members of special populations whoare not candida tes for entry into mainstream CTE ProgramMajors nevertheless make a successful and sustained entry intothe labor marketinto sheltered, supported, or competitiveemployment, as appropriate.

Fundamental life and employment skills would be a majorfeature of all OSE programs, and oc cupations that do notrequire mastery of Algebra and other advanced academictopics would be the primary career targets. Examples of thetypes of programs which might make up an OccupationalSpecial Education Gateway include: Groundskeeping;Photocopy Machine Operation; Shampooing; ConstructionLabor; Home Health Assisting; Housekeeping; Hall/CafeteriaMonitoring; and, Automobile Detailing .



40/76

40

6. Career Academies: CTE Smaller Learning Communities

CTE Program Majors in DC are grouped into 12 CareerAcademies : CTE-based smaller lea rning communitiesplanned to meet the standards of Title V, Part D, Subpart 4 of

the No C hild Left Behind Act (NCLB):I. Agribusiness & Natural Resources;II. Arts, Media & Communications;III. Business Administration & Finance;IV. Sales & Personal Services;V. Construction & Design;VI. Health & Medical Sciences;VII. Hospitality & Tourism;VIII. Human Services, Education & Training;

IX. Law, Public Safety & Security;X. Information Technology;XI. Engineering & Manufacturing; and,XII. Transportation.

Derived from the 16 Career Clusters originally defined byOVAE, the 12 Career Ac ademies are custom tailored to fit thespecific labor market and ec onomic development priorities of DC (based on labor market data, 32 employer surveys, and inputfrom the Workforce Investment Council). Eac h Ac ademyrepresents a broad, industry-based cluster of occupa tions,together with the programs of study that prepare students forcareers in those occupational areas. Together, the 12Ac ademies encompass the entire labor market; all 20 sec tors of the C ensus Bureaus North American Industry C lassificationSystem (NAICS, the standard nationa l taxonomy of industries)are subsumed within one or another Ac ademy.

On the following page is a chart that crosswalks the DCPSCareer Academies with the 16 OVAE Clusters, the 15 IndustrySectors defined by the National Skill Standards Board (thesource model for the OVAE taxonomy), the 20 NAICS sec tors(the original point of departure for the NSSB sectors), and theten topical specializations defined by NCES for the SpecialLabor Market Preparation arena (i.e., CTE). The NCESspecializations evolved out of the traditional vocationaleducation program clusters ( Agribusiness Education, Business &Office Education, Marketing & Distributive Education, HealthOccupations Education, Occupational Home Economics, andTrade & Industrial Education ).



41/76

4 1

Industries, Sectors, Career Clusters & Academies C NCES Specializations

Agriculture &Renewable Resources

[Communications]

Business[& Finance]

Marketing & Distribution

Personal & Other Serv.

[Construction]

Heath Care[Human Services]Child Care & Education

Food Service & Hospitality

Public &Protective Services

Technology

Trade & Industry

[Transportation]

NAICS Industries

11 Agriculture21 Mining22 Utilities

71 Arts & Entertainment

55 Company Management56 Admin. Support52 Finance & Insurance

44 Retail Trade53 Real Estate

81 Other services

23 Construction

62 Health Care &Social Assistance

61 Educational Services

72 Accomoda./Food Serv.

92 Public Administration

51 Information

31 Manufacturing54 Prof./Sci./Tech. Serv.

48 Transportation

NSSB Sectors

AgricultureMiningUtilities & Environment

[Arts & Entertainment]

Business &Administrative Services

Finance &

preparing the workforce of dc's future 1 5

Documents